Download - Culture and Neighborhood Revitalization
Culture and Neighborhood Revitalization
Delaware Valley Grantmakers
April 2008
Social Impact of the Arts Project
Uses geographic information systems to link original data on artists, cultural providers, and cultural participation to existing socio-economic data
Develops “data partnerships” with regional organizations like GPCA and individual cultural organizations
Conducts policy research on role of the arts and culture: Dynamics of Culture—research on changes in the cultural sector and its impact on
communities sponsored by the Rockefeller Foundation Philadelphia and Camden Cultural Participation Benchmark Project—a study for the
Community Partners Program of the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation Culture Builds Community evaluation—an evaluation of a grant-making initiative of the
William Penn Foundation Arts Resources for Children and Youth in Philadelphia—a study with the Central
Philadelphia Development Corporation for The Pew Charitable Trusts
Major findings
• The “cultural ecosystem” is a mix of interdependent non-profit, for-profit, and informal assets
• Since 1980, cultural assets have been a “leading” indicator of neighborhood revitalization
• “Natural” cultural districts are neighborhoods where the culture/revitalization link is strongest
Cases weighted by POP00
Cultural providers with 1/2 mi 1997 (quartiles)
Highest quartile50th -74th %25th-49th %Lowest quartile
Pe
rce
nt
revita
lize
d
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Explaining culture’s impact
Strengthen local civic engagement and “collective efficacy”
Creates connection across barriers of geography, social class, and ethnicity
The social network of artists and cultural organizations
Eighty percent of community cultural participants cross neighborhood boundaries to attend events
The TRF/SIAP collaboration
TRF’s work on local housing markets for Neighborhood Transformation Initiative
SIAP’s 2001 paper argued that a more complete portrait of neighborhood vitality should include non-economic indicators
Rockefeller Foundation approached SIAP about finding a partner to bring cultural indicator research to a wider audience.
Goals of Rockefeller-sponsored project
Review and synthesize existing literature on the relationship of culture and revitalization
Refine methods for linking TRF’s housing market analysis with measures of non-economic vitality
Develop an approach to bridge gap between cultural development and community development
A common perspective
Through the collaboration, TRF and SIAP arrived at a common perspective.
We agreed that: The cultural
engagement/revitalization connection is a policy lever that demonstrates the value of “market value analysis.
“Let practice lead policy”: build on sector’s initiative and strengths
An ecological approach that focuses on how different elements of the cultural sector interact in the process of place-making is the most productive starting point for the emerging field of culture-based revitalization
Using TRF's “market value analysis” for 2001 and 2006, we found that, in Philadelphia’s economically challenged neighborhoods, higher rates of cultural participation were a “leading indicator” of economic vitality.
Products
• “Harvest Document” evaluates state-of-the-art research on culture and revitalization
• Policy briefs:• Cultivating “natural”
cultural districts
• From creative economy to creative society
• Migrants, communities, and culture
• “Creativity and Neighborhood Development: Strategies for Community Investment”
• Policy brief on the financing of the Crane Arts Building
The way forward: two complementary approaches
A market-driven strategy focused on places where strategic investments could generate significant payoffs for investors and neighborhoods
A philanthropic strategy focused on maximizing the social benefits of the arts and culture across the city and region In most urban neighborhoods, the work of artists, for-
profits, and nonprofits generates positive social benefits but rarely sustains a self-supporting market.
These neighborhoods need a hybrid approach that combines traditional philanthropy with a sensitivity to the new role that artists and for-profits play.
Philanthropy’s emerging role
Decline in traditional sources of support for community-based cultural providers has generated a variety of innovations
Newer sources of social service funding (incarcerated youth, public schools) often divert artists and organizations from primary mission
New institutional forms—like the artists’ center—provide more nimble ways of spreading benefits of culture across urban neighborhoods
Ann Markusen and Amanda Johnson, “Artists’ Centers: Evolution and Impact on Careers, Neighborhoods and Economies” (2006)
For more information
www.sp2.upenn.edu/SIAPhttp://www.trfund.com/resource/creativity.html